Colorado Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Case over Discriminatory Contribution Limits

Colorado campaign finance laws permit an individual to donate $400 to a candidate for the legislature who is nominated by primary. Almost always, only Democrats and Republicans are nominated by primary in Colorado. The statute also says no one can give more than $200 to a legislative candidate who is nominated by convention, or by petition. Generally, independent candidates are nominated by petition; minor party candidates are nominated either by convention or by petition.

Last year, independent write-in candidate Kathleen Curry filed a federal lawsuit, arguing that the U.S. Constitution does not permit a state to discriminate against her, and other non-major party candidates, by limiting contributions to her to only half as much money as the limit on Democratic and Republican candidates. She filed the case in U.S. District Court. However, on September 16, the U.S. District Court Judge ruled that perhaps the Colorado statute violates the Colorado Constitution. He asked the Colorado Supreme Court to answer that question. On February 4, 2011, the Colorado Supreme Court agreed to do so.

The Colorado Constitution, Article 28, section 3, says, “No person…shall make to a candidate committee…aggregate contributions for a primary or a general election in excess of…$200 to any one state senate or state house of representatives…candidate committee.” The statute, however, says someone can contribute $400 to a legislative candidate who went through the primary process. The donor can give $200 during the primary season and another $200 in the general election season. But it also lets a donor give $400 during the primary season, although that donor can then no longer give anything to that candidate in the general election season. And the statute lets a donor give $400 during the general election season to a candidate, if that donor had not contributed to that candidate during the primary season.

If the Colorado Supreme Court rules that the statute is not consistent with the State Constitution, then the federal court won’t need to make a decision about whether the statute violates the U.S. Constitution. The name of the case in both courts is Riddle v Ritter. The first-named plaintiff, Joelle Riddle, is someone who wanted to contribute $400 to the candidate-plaintiff, Kathleen Curry. All the briefs in the Colorado Supreme Court are due by late April 2011.


Comments

Colorado Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Case over Discriminatory Contribution Limits — 2 Comments

  1. How many MORON States have fixed dollar amounts in State Constitutions ??? — regardless of ongoing MAJOR inflation in the per person/adult money supply by the U.S.A. regime.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.